"Don't hold it against me" - On disregarding a candidate's social media
Social media is quite a conundrum. It’s a place where the most important information and ideas can be effortlessly beamed to billions of people around the world; a place where the latest news can be shared and discussed; a place where marginalized communities can connect and seek refuge. It’s also a place that is founded on cat pictures, memes and even hatred.
Regardless of which platform and discussions one participates in, eventually there is a clear line between the virtual and the reality. In 2017, CareerBuilder found that over 70 percent of employers were looking at candidates’ social media as part of the hiring process. It makes sense, right? That’s part of who a person is, and considering that work places are more often placing stress on culture and work ethic in tandem with education and experience, managers want to hire someone who makes sense not just for the position but also for the corporate culture. Exploring an applicant’s character beyond that presented on a polished resume and/or portfolio is seemingly logical. This survey found that a number of hiring committees (54 percent) found content that was worthy of disqualification for a particular position:
Candidate posted provocative or inappropriate photographs, videos or information: 39 percent
Candidate posted information about them drinking or using drugs: 38 percent
Candidate had discriminatory comments related to race, gender or religion: 32 percent
Candidate bad-mouthed their previous company or fellow employee: 30 percent
Candidate lied about qualifications: 27 percent
Candidate had poor communication skills: 27 percent
Candidate was linked to criminal behavior: 26 percent
Candidate shared confidential information from previous employers: 23 percent
Candidate's screen name was unprofessional: 22 percent
Candidate lied about an absence: 17 percent
Candidate posted too frequently: 17 percent
Some of these make sense. Obviously, a person lacking so much self-awareness that they post illegal activity on their social media profiles is not someone you likely want in your office. But others? Posting pictures of drinking with friends? A majority (63 percent) of Americans drink alcohol regularly. Of course some of these pictures are bound to end up online. Posting too frequently? This is bewildering. Some people use social media excessively, especially when unemployed. It is neither good nor bad and a hiring committee should not pretend to know the circumstances of an individual’s private life. Bad-mouthing a previous employer? It depends on the circumstances. Obviously, this may not be a good look. However, it’s entirely within the realm of possibility that the previous employer is deserving of the criticism; more so, it’s possible that this criticism is also being addressed internally. This should not be inherently disqualifying. Poor communication skills? How someone communicates on their social media profiles is their business. It is not in any way indicative of how they can or would communicate in a professional setting.
This is a problem for millennials. Millennials posting stupid stuff on social media is certainly a problem. Growing up in the internet age, or at least part of it, millennials are generally well-versed in technology and social media and sometimes lack wisdom when using it. Baby boomers, by contrast, lack much of the knowledge but are better-equipped, on average, to behave more wisely. The issue will truly be ever-more present for Generation Z. In an essay published in The New Yorker last week titled “How Social Media Shapes Our Identity”, author Nausicaa Renner, citing educator and researcher Kate Eichhorn, argues that social media “…can prevent those who wish to break with their past from doing so cleanly.”
Childhood is disappearing as young people are caught between the ignorance and innocence of childhood that is so well-documented on social media platforms and the moral and ethical maturity expected in adulthood. An offensive tweet or a silly (but embarrassing) video has the potential to destroy a person’s life. One such extremely well-known example, also cited in article above, is the case of Ghyslain Raza, a Canadian teen who recorded himself wielding a golf-ball retriever as though it were a light-saber. The video eventually went viral and is commonly referred to as “Star Wars Kid.” Most people also know that he was bullied for years after the video went viral, and he even slipped into a deep depression and considered suicide. This was years after the video was posted, and he still couldn’t escape. Another well-known example of a social media snafu is the case of Justine Sacco. In 2013, Sacco posted a tweet before boarding a flight to South Africa: “Going to Africa. Hope I don’t get AIDS. Just kidding. I’m white!” Obviously a horribly tone-deaf tweet. Oddly enough, it was actually satirizing white privilege and the fictional, privileged concept many Americans have regarding Africa. That did not matter, though. Before she landed, she had lost her job and became a social pariah. She, too, slipped into a horrible depression and considered suicide. She could not find work and could not move past her mistake. In a widely-viewed TED Talk, Monica Lewinsky discussed her experiences following the scandal from the 1990s involving then-President Bill Clinton. She discussed her inability to move past the scandal and shame being heaped on her. She failed to get a job for years following the incident and only recently began speaking more publicly about her experiences.
Clearly there is a difference between national-covered scandal and a poorly-executed tweet with no retweets or likes. The principle is the same, though. People post on social media with little regard for who sees it, and that’s okay. Often times, people say, “You should think before you post!” And yes, you should. I agree. But you should do that for the sake of decency, not because you’re afraid that it will be unfairly and wrongly used against you during a hiring process. In an article from Time Magazine published in 2015, S. Kumar writes, in addition to the poor “return-on-investment” of monitoring candidates’ and employees’ social media,
There is also the problem of bias. Americans today are arguably more socially and politically conscious than previous generations and actively use social media to convey their thoughts, debate important topics, and fight for causes. In some cases, employers may even be supportive, such as if a job candidate works tirelessly to raise money for breast cancer research, but in other cases, there is a real danger of people being penalized for their personal views on things like politics, race, or religion.
That is a serious problem. It’s nothing short of a form of discrimination, if you ask me. Negatively judging a person whom you’ve never met by crafting a mental caricature based on their political or religious leanings posted on their own personal social media pages is a disastrous and unethical policy. And yet, employers do it. More so, many are encouraged to do it. It’s usually considered basic research when learning about a candidate.
Here’s the thing: if you won’t hire me because I choose to be my authentic self both in-person and online, I don’t want to work for you. I want nothing to do with a company that expects an employee to behave like some stiff with no personality, ESPECIALLY when I’m using my own time and my own space online. It’s often proposed that aspiring professionals should create both a personal and professional social media presence. This is also cited as reason the Time Magazine article that ROI on social media monitoring is pretty low, since millennials especially are so good at manipulating their online presence and privatizing their personal profiles.
We all make mistakes online. I once wrote a curse-filled rant on the self-care movement and posted in Twitter and LinkedIn. It’s still on my blog, this very blog that you’re reading! The coarse language may be a complete turn-off for some readers (and potential employers). It is what it is, if you ask me. I felt that way at the time, and I still do to some extent. I’m not going to modify it; people are free to hold it against me.
I’m a millennial, and some of the above examples I referenced are from people even older than I. It’s an issue for people my age, but it’ll be an even more difficult and pervasive issue for younger people. Dr. Kate Eichhorn’s newest book, The End of Forgetting, is the latest authoritative piece exploring this issue. People are unable to forget and move past their childhoods. They cannot cull their past mistakes and create a new identity. It’s an age where everything is being remembered, and it’s all, as some would argue, fair game to bring up and use against you. But it objectively isn’t. It shouldn’t be. It may not be a popular thing to say around HR folks (who, by the way, are not your friends) and managers (who can sometimes be straight-up bullies), but using social media against employees and candidates is a dangerous, disgusting and discriminatory practice that needs to end immediately.
Header photo courtesy of dualdflipflop on Flickr.